TightWind is written by Kyle Baxter. Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.

New York Times editorial:

Mr. Obama has demonstrated that he can be thoughtful and farsighted, but, like all occupants of the Oval Office, he is a politician, subject to the pressures of re-election. No one in that position should be able to unilaterally order the killing of American citizens or foreigners located far from a battlefield — depriving Americans of their due-process rights — without the consent of someone outside his political inner circle.

Maybe it’s poorly written, but that seems to say that while the president shouldn’t be able to unilaterally order the killing of American citizens, it might be okay if someone outside his “political inner circle” must approve it. Why would that be any different? And why is it that being a politician makes the president unfit to make that decision on their own, but someone separate from the office’s politics should be able to?

This editorial is puzzling, because it criticizes the Obama administration’s assassination program for bizarre reasons. That the president is a politician and subject to elections is not what makes it wrong for them to order the killing of American citizens. What makes it wrong is that a citizen should not be killed without even stepping foot in a courtroom because an individual or committee decided they should die.